A 12/13-31
Legislative Council
Agenda
Wednesday 5 June 2013 at 11:00 am
I. Tabling of Paper
Report No. 18/12-13 of the House Committee on Consideration of Subsidiary Legislation and Other Instruments
(to be presented by Hon Andrew LEUNG, Chairman of the House Committee)
II. Questions
1. Hon Martin LIAO to ask: (Translation)
It has been reported that the suspects of several family homicide cases, which happened recently, are youngsters addicted to playing online violent electronic games ("online games") at home. In addition, there have been reported incidents from time to time in which youngsters, who had been addicted to online games, quarrelled with their parents or even beat their parents who had tried to stop them from playing online games. Given that such incidents of family tragedies and family violence have aroused public concern about the impact of violent electronic games on youngsters' mental development, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it has conducted any focus studies on the correlation between violent electronic games and crimes of violence; if it has, of the details, and whether the results of such studies have shown a positive correlation between these two factors; if not, whether it will consider conducting such studies; whether it has compiled statistics on cases of youngsters who had suffered mental disorder as a result of addiction to such games in the past five years; if so, of such statistics; if not, whether it will compile such statistics; (b) whether it has drawn up policies and measures to help youngsters addicted to violent electronic games; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; of the government bodies and community organizations in Hong Kong which currently provide psychological counselling and assistance to such youngsters; and (c) given that some psychologists have pointed out that "home-staying men" who are addicted to online games often lack communication skills and have difficulties in making friends, resulting in the development of radical personality, whether the Government will consider enhancing contents such as self-understanding and social skills in the secondary school curriculum, and providing specialized counselling and support services for youngsters addicted to online games and surfing the Internet, so as to instil in them correct values and help them establish good interpersonal relationship?
| Public Officers to reply | : | Secretary for Labour and Welfare
Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development |
2. Hon James TIEN to ask: (Translation)
Quite a number of members of the public have relayed to me that in terms of functions, roles and status, the present Executive Council ("ExCo") is nothing like the then ExCo before the introduction of the "Accountability System for Principal Officials" in 2002 and the ExCo during the governance of the British Hong Kong Government. There are also members of the public raising queries about the current operation of the ExCo, e.g. a regular meeting has been cancelled recently because of no agenda item, a Non-official Member has been granted leave of absence for over half a year, and another Non-official Member has resigned on the ground that he is "under police investigation". In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it has assessed if the aforesaid situations of the ExCo have arisen because selection of ExCo Members is not prudent enough or the support for the ExCo is not comprehensive; if it has assessed, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (b) whether it has assessed if the existing functions, roles and status of the ExCo have deviated from the requirements under the Basic Law (in particular Articles 54 to 56), and how such aspects compare with those of the then ExCo before the introduction of the Accountability System for Principal Officials and the ExCo during the governance of the British Hong Kong Government; and (c) whether currently there are arrangements for policies to be first discussed at an informal meeting comprising several ExCo Members before their submission to the ExCo for discussion and decision; if there are such arrangements, of the membership of that informal meeting; and the average number of hours of ExCo meeting per week since the inauguration of the incumbent Government?
3. Hon Ronny TONG to ask: (Translation)
On the 17th of last month, the Hong Kong Mercantile Exchange Limited ("HKMEx") decided to surrender its authorization to provide automated trading services because its revenues had fallen short of expenditure. It has been reported that the major shareholder of HKMEx admitted that he was in debt due to his investments on HKMEx. Since that major shareholder was a Member of the Executive Council ("ExCo") who has resigned recently, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the existing system of declaration of interests by ExCo Members requires them to declare their personal debts and the debts of the companies they own; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; whether the authorities will review the declaration system, so as to avoid the borrowing activities or debts of an ExCo Member or the companies he owns causing a conflict of interests with the public office as an ExCo Member, or the problem of the confidential information of ExCo being leaked; (b) whether the integrity checking of candidates for appointment as ExCo Members includes the assessment of the stability of their financial situations; if it does not, of the reasons for that; if so, how it ensures that ExCo Members declare changes in their financial situations during their terms of office; and (c) whether there were any candidates for appointment as ExCo Members in the past five years who had failed in the integrity checking because of their personal debts or the debts of the companies they owned and were eventually not appointed; if so, of the details; whether the Government will revoke the appointment of an ExCo Member who is heavily in debt; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
4. Hon IP Kin-yuen to ask: (Translation)
In recent years, some aided schools (quite a number of them being traditional prestigious schools) have become Direct Subsidy Scheme ("DSS") schools one after another. However, some aided schools' plans of becoming DSS schools have met with strong opposition from the parents of their students and the alumni, who worry that students from poor families will be deterred by the high school fees of DSS schools from applying for admission to these schools, which contradicts the schools' vision of education for all. On the other hand, a study has found that, the percentage of secondary school students from wealthy families admitted to university in 2011 was 3.7 times of that of students from poor families, while it was just 1.2 times 20 years ago. Some members of the community are concerned whether the opportunities for students from poor families for admission to university will be reduced further as they have been deterred by the high school fees to study in DSS schools with better academic results. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) how the authorities, when vetting and approving applications from aided schools for admission to DSS, handle and compile statistics on the views on such applications expressed by stakeholders (including parents, alumni, teachers, education bodies and residents in the district, etc.), and whether such views have decisive effect when the authorities consider such applications; (b) given that the objectives of DSS, when it was first launched by the Government, included "[enabling] parents [to] have greater choice in finding suitable schools for their children", but some parents of students have pointed out that the choices for their children to attend their preferred schools in the district have been reduced as they cannot afford the high school fees of DSS schools, whether the authorities have assessed if such a situation reflects that the original objective has not been achieved; whether they have capped the percentage of the number of DSS schools in the total number of publicly-funded schools; and (c) whether it has assessed if the authorities' approval for aided schools with better academic results to become DSS schools, which charge higher school fees, will reduce the opportunities of students from the middle and lower classes to attend such schools, thereby affecting their opportunities of pursuing further studies and upward mobility in future, and aggravating problems such as income disparity between the rich and the poor as well as social isolation, etc.; if it has assessed, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
5. Hon IP Kwok-him to ask: (Translation)
Earlier, the Family Planning Association of Hong Kong ("FPAHK") released its findings on "Family Planning Knowledge, Attitude and Practice in Hong Kong Survey 2012". The survey findings reveal that the motivation of married couples or cohabitants of Hong Kong for childbearing in 2012 was the highest over the past two decades. While a majority of the women respondents set their ideal parity at two children, their average actual parity continued to decline over the past decade, down to 1.24 children in 2012. FPAHK concludes that "[t]argeted incentives such as financial allowances and parental support would help motivate couples to consider having more children." In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the respective measures introduced by the relevant policy bureaux and departments to encourage local women to give birth, since the Government published the first Task Force on Population Report in 2003; whether the authorities have evaluated the effectiveness of such measures; if they have, of the assessment results; if not, the reasons for that; (b) as the Government had pointed out in the Steering Committee on Population Policy Progress Report 2012 published in May 2012 that "[t]he Government will continue to explore measures to encourage local women to give birth", of the measures explored by the authorities last year to encourage childbearing; and (c) whether it knows which of the member states of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development have in place a policy to encourage their nationals to give birth by means of cash allowances; whether the Government will consider making reference to overseas practices and introducing childcare allowances so as to encourage childbearing?
6. Hon Andrew LEUNG to ask: (Translation)
Some members of the information technology ("IT") industry have relayed to me that the application of information and communications technology is of particular importance to small and medium enterprises ("SMEs") as it helps them improve workflow, enhance the efficiency of business operations and service standards, as well as boost their competitiveness. The cloud technology, which has become increasingly popular recently, may even help SMEs adopt IT application systems that are suitable for their scales of operation via the Internet and mobile networks with low start-up costs. However, many SMEs are still sceptical about accessing IT services via cloud computing, and they are particularly concerned about the security problems with cloud computing. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the authorities have new measures to promote the use of information and communications technology by SMEs; if they have, of the relevant measures; if not, the reasons for that; (b) regarding the potential risks in information security of cloud computing, how the authorities help SMEs understand and remove such risks; and (c) as the authorities have indicated that they are cooperating with the Hong Kong Productivity Council in studying ways to help SMEs adopt cloud computing services for enhancing operational efficiency, productivity and customer services, of the details of the study and the expected time when the relevant measures can be launched to help SMEs?
*7. Hon Christopher CHEUNG to ask: (Translation)
According to the Financial Transactions Tax ("FTT") Law of Italy, which came into force on 1 January this year, FTT is due by the persons to which financial instruments (such as shares) issued by Italian resident companies are transferred, regardless of their place of residence and the place where the contract is concluded. PRADA S.p.A., a company listed on The Stock Exchange of Hong Kong ("SEHK"), published an announcement on 5 March this year, pointing out that transfers of its shares would be affected by the provision, and financial intermediaries had to collect FTT from their clients and transfer it to the Italian Inland Revenue Office. Some members of the securities industry have relayed to me that neither the Securities and Futures Commission nor SEHK has given a clear account of the related arrangements so far, rendering it difficult for securities firms to explain to their clients and investors the procedures and details regarding the collection and handling of FTT. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the Italian authorities have any legal basis for requesting financial intermediaries in Hong Kong to collect the aforesaid tax for them; if they have, of the details and how it is to be executed; and (b) whether the Government has assessed the impact, on Hong Kong's position as an international financial centre, of financial intermediaries assisting the Italian authorities in collecting the aforesaid tax in Hong Kong from investors; if it has, of the details; whether the Government has considered making reference to the practice of the Italian authorities to impose FTT on investors of companies which are registered in Hong Kong and listed overseas?
*8. Hon Tommy CHEUNG to ask: (Translation)
Some parents have pointed out that the places in the international schools in the territory, especially those the main medium of instruction of which is English, are insufficient, and their tuition fees are becoming more and more exorbitant, which have rendered some expatriates working in Hong Kong unable to arrange their school-age children to come and reside in Hong Kong. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it knows if the waiting time for admission to the international schools in Hong Kong is longer than that in nearby international cities such as Singapore, Tokyo, Shanghai, etc.; of the respective fill-up rates of and the numbers of students waiting for admission to the various international schools in Hong Kong at present; if such figures are not available, whether the authorities will conduct relevant surveys to ascertain the actual situation; (b) whether it knows the proportions of local and non-local students in international schools at present, and set out in table form the respective numbers and percentages of local and non-local students in various international schools, with a breakdown by whether such schools are subvented or self-financed; (c) whether it knows if the number of local students studying in international schools is on a rising trend in recent years; of the respective total numbers of students and average fill-up rates of international primary and secondary schools the main medium of instruction of which is English, as well as the respective numbers and percentages of local and non-local students in such schools, in each of the past three years (set out in the table below);
Primary schools School year Total number of students
(average fill-up rate)Total number of local students
(percentage in the total number of students)Total number of non-local students
(percentage in the total number of students)2012-2013 2011-2012 2010-2011 Secondary schools School School year Total number of students
(average fill-up rate)Total number of local students
(percentage in the total number of students)Total number of non-local students
(percentage in the total number of students)2012-2013 2011-2012 2010-2011 (d) of the highest, lowest and median tuition fees charged by international schools in the current school year, with a breakdown by whether such schools are subvented or self-financed and whether they are primary or secondary schools (set out in the table below); of the measures taken by the Government to ensure that international schools are not heading for "aristocratization" by charging exorbitant tuition fees which are unaffordable by ordinary families;
Tuition fees Secondary schools Primary schools Subvented Self-financed Subvented Self-financed Highest Lowest Median (e) as the Government's latest information has indicated that there will still be a shortfall of 4 203 primary places in the 2016-2017 school year after taking into account the additional places to be provided under the various expansion and redevelopment projects to be implemented by the international schools, of any other specific contingency measures taken by the authorities to tackle the problem of shortage of international school places; and (f) of the respective numbers of applications received, in each of the years from 2007 to 2012, by the Government from international schools for relocation to vacant school premises, expansion and redevelopment, and the respective numbers of additional places provided under such projects (set out in the table below); the average time required for processing such applications; whether it will adopt measures to simplify and expedite the relevant procedures?
Year Number of applications Average time required for processing the applications Number of applications approved
(total number of additional places provided)Relocation to vacant school premises Expansion Redevelopment 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007
*9. Dr Hon Kenneth CHAN to ask: (Translation)
In recent years, mainstream primary and secondary schools ("mainstream schools") in Hong Kong have tied in with the policy on integrated education and admitted students with special educational needs (including students with disabilities). Regarding the provision of barrier-free facilities for use by students in the premises of various primary and secondary schools in Hong Kong, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the number of premises of mainstream schools in Hong Kong and whether it knows, among such school premises, the respective numbers of those which have been provided with the following barrier-free facilities: (i) lifts; (ii) lifts meeting the standards for use by wheelchair users; (iii) ramps for use by wheelchair users; (iv) toilets for persons with disabilities that meet the relevant standards; (v) barrier-free facilities to assist persons with visual impairment; and (vi) barrier-free facilities to assist persons with hearing impairment; (b) whether mainstream schools are required, in carrying out major alteration or maintenance works in their premises, to install various kinds of barrier-free facilities according to the latest design guidelines relating to barrier-free facilities issued by the Buildings Department; if they are required to do so, of the implementation details; if they are not required to do so, the reasons for that; of the number of school premises in which additional barrier-free facilities were installed in the course of alteration or maintenance works in the past three years, and the details of such works; (c) if it knows whether there were cases in the past three school years in which students with disabilities were not admitted or forced to change schools because the barrier-free facilities in the schools concerned were inadequate; if there were such cases, of the number of cases in each school year and the details; during the same period, whether there were any students with disabilities seeking assistance from the authorities and organizations such as the Equal Opportunities Commission, etc. because the barrier-free facilities in their schools were inadequate; if there were, of the respective numbers of cases in each school year and the details; and (d) whether the authorities will formulate work plans to comprehensively improve the barrier-free facilities in the premises of all mainstream schools in Hong Kong; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*10. Hon Frankie YICK to ask: (Translation)
The restored Yau Ma Tei Theatre ("the Theatre") was officially commissioned in mid-July last year. At present, the Theatre mainly provides performance, rehearsal and training venues for Chinese opera activities. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the utilization of the auditorium in the Theatre (excluding the two function rooms) from mid-July last year to mid-May this year, set out in the table below; and Type of opera Performance Informal performance
(including on-site rehearsal before performance)Training Matinee performance Evening performance Daytime Evening Daytime Evening Week- day Week- end Week- day Week- end Week- day Week- end Week- day Week- end Week- day Week- end Week- day Week- end Cantonese opera Jing opera Qun opera Others (please specify) Total Weekday: Monday to Friday
Weekend: Saturday, Sunday and public holidays(b) of the utilization rate of the Theatre since its commissioning; whether the authorities have assessed if such a utilization rate was satisfactory and met the expected level; if they have, of the assessment results?
*11. Hon Michael TIEN to ask: (Translation)
The Food and Environmental Hygiene Department ("FEHD") received 4 955 complaints against illegal extension of business area by restaurants last year, of which 3 645 cases were substantiated. However, the respective numbers of successful prosecutions instituted by FEHD under sections 31(1)(b) and 34C of the Food Business Regulation (Cap. 132 sub. leg. X) and section 4A of the Summary Offences Ordinance (Cap. 228) were 521, 847 and 894 only. The Office of The Ombudsman, Hong Kong pointed out in its direct investigation report published in March 2013 that FEHD's law enforcement actions had been "superficial and produced little results", and that the three-tier appeal mechanism under the "Demerit Points System" targeting at the acts of contravention of restaurant licensees was "cumbersome", resulting in the persistence of the problem of illegal extension of business area by restaurants. On the other hand, some members of the public have relayed to me that illegal extension of business area by restaurants not only causes obstruction to pavements and deterioration of the street environment, the noises so created also seriously affect the residents in the neighbourhood. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the authorities have comprehensively reviewed the law enforcement procedure and efforts on a regular basis to see if such procedure and efforts are sufficient to combat the problem of illegal extension of business area by restaurants; (b) apart from the aforesaid laws, whether the authorities will consider instituting prosecutions, by invoking other relevant laws, e.g. those relating to cleanliness in public places and noise control, against illegal extension of business area by restaurants, so as to impose heavier penalties on the restaurants concerned, thereby enhancing the deterrent effect of law enforcement actions; and (c) in respect of restaurant licensees who have been repeatedly convicted of the offence of illegal extension of business area, whether the authorities have considered increasing the penalties imposed on them, so as to enhance the deterrent effect (e.g. requesting the Court to increase the amount of fines, lowering the maximum accumulated demerit points required under the Demerit Points System for suspending or cancelling the licence of the restaurant concerned, as well as extending the duration of licence suspension or cancellation)?
*12. Hon Alice MAK to ask: (Translation)
The Tung Wah Group of Hospitals Tin Sau Bazaar ("Tin Sau Bazaar") in Tin Shui Wai, which is set up with the facilitation of the Government and under the operation and management of the Tung Wah Group of Hospitals ("TWGHs"), has commenced operation for nearly four months. It has been reported that the business of the stalls in the Bazaar is dull owing to the unsatisfactory conditions of its infrastructure and ancillary facilities (e.g. problems of serious accumulation of water at the site after heavy rain, insufficient power supply and inadequate publicity, etc.). In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it knows (i) the respective numbers of stalls which have been rented out and left vacant, (ii) the total patronage and average weekly patronage, (iii) the average weekly turnover of each stall, (iv) the respective numbers of stall operators who have surrendered their tenancy and those who will do so soon, and (v) the number of stalls which have been surrendered and rented out again, since Tin Sau Bazaar has commenced operation; (b) as the Architectural Services Department started to install additional surface channels in Tin Sau Bazaar in April this year, whether the authorities have assessed the impact of such works on the stall operators; of the number of stall operators who needed to suspend business while the works were in progress; whether the authorities have arranged any temporary venues for them to display and sell their goods, as well as granted them rental waiver/reduction or compensation; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (c) whether the Home Affairs Department has discussed with TWGHs and the Yuen Long District Council since April this year the further enhancement of the ancillary facilities in Tin Sau Bazaar (e.g. laying floor tiles, beautifying the stalls, etc.); if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (d) of the details of the publicity efforts made by the Government for Tin Sau Bazaar in the past half year (including the expenditure and manpower involved); the details of the publicity efforts to be made by the Government in the coming 12 months (including whether it will step up publicity efforts and organize more activities to attract patronage to the Bazaar, as well as the projected expenditure and manpower involved)?
*13. Hon James TO to ask: (Translation)
At present, if members of the public do not wish to send the carcasses of their pets to the landfills for disposal like refuse, they need to use pet carcass cremation services provided by pet funeral service companies. Since such services are usually located in commercial/residential or industrial buildings without any regulation, cremation of pet carcasses has generated environmental hygiene and air pollution problems, thus causing nuisances to residents in the neighbourhood. In view of this, the Food and Environmental Hygiene Committee of the Yau Tsim Mong District Council last year urged the Government to introduce legislation to regulate such activities. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it has compiled statistics on the approximate number of households in the territory which are currently keeping pets, the respective numbers of such households keeping cats, dogs and other pets, as well as the respective numbers of cats, dogs and other pets kept by such households; if so, of the statistics; (b) of the number of animal carcasses collected at refuse collection points and, among them, the respective numbers of those of dogs, cats and other animals, in each year from 2009 to 2012 and the first quarter of this year; (c) whether it knows the current number of pet funeral service companies in the territory which provide pet carcasses cremation and handling services, the districts and types of buildings in which such companies are mainly located, and the number of animal carcasses they cremate each year; (d) of the total current number of "specified process" licences (applicable to cremators of an installed capacity exceeding 0.5 tonne per hour) issued under the Air Pollution Control Ordinance (Cap. 311) for cremators and, among such licences, the number of those issued for pet carcass cremators; whether the authorities had, in the past five years, conducted sample tests on the exhaust of such pet carcass cremators to determine if the exhaust contained any harmful substances such as dioxins; if they had, of the outcome; if not, the reasons for that; whether it will investigate if the operations of those pet carcass cremators located in commercial/residential and industrial buildings have caused air pollution; (e) of the number of complaints received by the authorities relating to pet funeral service companies, the major contents of such complaints and the districts where the companies under complaint were mainly located, as well as the number of such complaints involving breaches of the relevant legislation on fire safety, environmental hygiene, air pollution or land use, in each of the past five years; (f) whether the services currently provided by the Government for the scattering of cremated human ashes at sea or in Gardens of Remembrance include services for scattering cremated pet ashes; if not, whether it will consider the addition of such services; (g) whether it has studied the legislation and approaches of overseas places for regulating the handling and cremation of pet carcasses; if so, whether the operations of such cremation are sited in annexes to facilities for cremation of human remains, and of the details; if not, whether the Government will consider conducting such a study; and (h) given that some members of the public have pointed out that there is currently a rising trend in the demand for pet carcass cremation services in Hong Kong, and the cremation processes cause nuisances to the densely populated communities, whether the authorities will consider afresh introducing legislation on pet carcass cremation services, so as to regulate such processes through a licensing system; whether they will, in the process of land use planning, identify suitable sites for provision of public pet carcass cremation services, so as to reduce the nuisances and health problems caused to residents by pet carcass cremation services?
*14. Hon KWOK Wai-keung to ask: (Translation)
At present, the refuse collection services in the territory are provided by the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department ("FEHD"), cleansing contractors ("contractors") engaged by FEHD, and other private companies. Although FEHD has put in place established guidelines and contract provisions to ensure respectively its refuse collection vehicles ("RCVs") and those of its contractors being kept in a clean and hygienic condition, some members of the public still complain to me about the impact of RCVs on environmental hygiene. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it knows the respective numbers of RCVs owned by FEHD, its contractors and other private companies in each of the past five years, together with a breakdown by whether they were fitted with a packer plate to cover the rear refuse hopper or of an enclosed type design; whether the authorities have plans to provide financial assistance for contractors and other private companies to replace the RCVs fitted with a packer plate with those of an enclosed type design; (b) of the number of complaints about RCVs received by the authorities in the past five years, together with a breakdown by the contents of the complaints (such as dripping of foul water and emission of odour); of the follow-up actions taken by the authorities on the relevant complaints; (c) of the number of cases in which contractors were penalized in the past five years for breaching the contract provisions on hygiene and operational requirements for RCVs, together with a breakdown by the type of breach and punitive action; whether it has considered updating the relevant contract provisions in order to raise the hygiene requirements for RCVs and strengthen the regulation of their operation; (d) whether the authorities have demarcated parking spaces on the roads exclusively for RCVs; if so, of the number of such parking spaces, together with a breakdown by District Council district; whether the authorities have assessed the adequacy of such parking spaces; whether it has plans to increase the number of such parking spaces; if not, of the reasons for that; and (e) given that I have received complaints from members of the public about the odours emitted by some RCVs parked at roadsides at night in the vicinity of their residence impacting on environmental hygiene, whether currently there is any relevant guideline or legislation stipulating that the parking location of an RCV should not be too close to residential areas; if so, of the details; if not, whether the authorities will consider imposing restrictions on the parking locations of RCVs?
*15. Hon Tony TSE to ask: (Translation)
It has been reported that the mainland customs launched the "Operation Green Fence" in February this year to tighten up the testing standards for imported waste and to ban the import of all waste which may pollute the environment such as used clothing, electronic waste, plastic waste, etc. As a result, a large quantity of waste to be exported and re-exported from Hong Kong has been stranded here, causing great pressure to Hong Kong's waste recyclers and landfills. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether it has assessed the quantity of waste stranded in Hong Kong as a result of the import ban imposed by the mainland customs since the launching of the Operation Green Fence; if it has, of the respective quantities of waste piled up at recycling yards and sent to landfills for disposal, with a breakdown by type of waste, as well as the percentages of the quantities of various types of waste in the total quantities of the corresponding types of waste in 2012; if not, the reasons for that, and whether it will seek information from the recyclers on the situation of stranded waste in Hong Kong; (b) whether the authorities had, prior to the launching of the Operation Green Fence by the mainland customs, assessed the impact of the operation on Hong Kong, and whether they had discussed the issue with the relevant mainland authorities; if they had, of the assessment and discussion results, the counter measures to cope with the situation and the discrepancy between the assessment results and the prevailing actual situations; if they had not, the reasons for that, and whether they have reviewed if the foresight and alertness of the authorities are inadequate; (c) whether it has assessed if the waste stranded in Hong Kong as a result of the import ban imposed by the mainland customs will continue to increase; if the assessment result is in the affirmative, of the respective growth rates of various types of waste; if the assessment result is in the negative, the reasons for that; and (d) whether it has assessed the impact on Hong Kong of the continuous increase in the waste stranded in Hong Kong; if it has, of the assessment results and the counter measures to cope with the situation, and whether it will discuss the issue with the relevant mainland authorities; if it has not, the reasons for that, and whether it will make an assessment as soon as possible?
*16. Hon Charles Peter MOK to ask: (Translation)
According to the Code on Access to Information ("the Code") promulgated by the authorities in 1995, members of the public may make requests to various bureaux or departments under the Code for access to the information held by the Government. However, the Code does not have legal effect, has never been amended, and does not apply to all public organizations. Furthermore, some members of the public have complained that the Government has rejected their requests for access to information without giving any reasons, and the criteria for determining whether or not to accede to such requests are vague. It is therefore difficult to safeguard transparency of information, and members of the public have difficulties in monitoring the use of public funds and conducting academic studies or research and development. It has been reported that in 2011 and in the first nine months of 2012, 52 and 43 requests for access to information made under the Code were rejected respectively, and the reasons most commonly given are, in order of frequency, "third party information" (35 cases), "legal restrictions" (13 cases), "privacy of the individual" (12 cases) and "management and operation of the public service" (10 cases). In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) given that according to paragraph 2.2 of the Code, if the public interest in disclosure of the information outweighs any harm or prejudice that could result, including both actual harm and prejudice and the risk or reasonable expectation of harm and prejudice ("the public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm or prejudice"), a department may refuse to disclose the information, and paragraph 2.2.3 of the Guidelines on Interpretation and Application ("Guidelines") of the Code states that a civil servant is required to act reasonably in reaching his/her decision, of the procedures for various government departments to conduct the "harm or prejudice" tests, and whether the authorities have put in place any mechanism to review the decisions made by various government departments and whether the justifications thereof are reasonable; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; of the number of requests for access to information that had been rejected in the past five years on the ground that the public interest in disclosure had not outweighed the harm or prejudice, the government departments involved, and the detailed considerations in arriving at the aforesaid ground, including how the "harm or prejudice" tests had been conducted and how public interest had been assessed; (b) given that it is stipulated in paragraph 2.14(a) of the Code that if the information is held for, or provided by, a third party, then such information may be disclosed with the third party's consent, or if the public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm or prejudice, and it is also stipulated in paragraph 1.22 of the Code that if the third party makes representations against disclosure, or fails to respond within the stipulated time, a decision will be taken as to whether the information should be disclosed on the ground that the public interest in disclosure outweighs the harm or prejudice, of the details of the cases for which approval had been given in the past five years to disclose information involving a third party on the ground that the public interest in disclosure had outweighed the harm or prejudice; whether notices were given to all of the third parties in question when requests for access to information involving third parties were rejected; if notices were not given, of the reasons for that; (c) given that it is stipulated in paragraph 2.13(a) of the Code that a department may refuse to disclose information relating to incomplete analysis, research or statistics, where disclosure could be misleading or deprive the department or any other person of priority of publication or commercial value, of the criteria adopted by departments for determining if the disclosure of such information could be misleading or deprive a person of priority of publication; of the numbers of requests for access to information rejected in the past five years on such grounds, the departments involved, and the detailed considerations in arriving at the aforesaid ground (including how to reach the decision that the disclosure of information could be misleading or deprive a person of priority of publication or commercial value); (d) whether it will require all public organizations to adopt the Code and set up a mechanism under which the decisions made by various government departments/public organizations on disclosure of information will be subject to review by a third party, such as the Office of The Ombudsman ("The Ombudsman"), to ensure that the relevant personnel interpret and apply the Code in accordance with the criteria set out in the Guidelines; and (e) notwithstanding a direct investigation on the Code is being conducted by The Ombudsman, whether the Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Bureau will proactively conduct public consultation on the policy aspects in reforming the Code, legislation on freedom of information and enacting archive laws; of the work schedule of the subcommittee of the Law Reform Commission to study the topic of access to information?
*17. Hon Kenneth LEUNG to ask: (Translation)
On 2 November last year, a Non-official Member of the Executive Council ("ExCo") requested leave of absence on the ground that he "needed time to concentrate on handling the queries arisen from the sale of his properties". The Chief Executive ("CE") acceded to the request and the ExCo Member has not yet resumed his duty up to the present. On the 24th of last month, another ExCo Non-official Member resigned from all public service positions, including that as an ExCo Member, on the ground that he "is under police investigation", and CE accepted his resignation. On the other hand, an open document of the ExCo indicates that the number of withdrawals of ExCo Members from discussions at ExCo meetings due to conflict of interest had increased substantially last year. Regarding the mechanisms for ExCo Members' taking leave of absence, suspension from duty and stepping down from the office, as well as issues relating to withdrawals from discussions due to conflict of interest, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the Government has currently any administrative guidelines specifying the respective circumstances under which an ExCo Non-official Member is required to "take leave of absence", "be suspended from duty" and step down from office; if so, of the details of such circumstances; whether it has set any requirements regarding the detailed arrangements for an ExCo Non-official Member to "take leave of absence" and "be suspended from duty", including the maximum period of leave of absence to be taken; (b) whether a quorum has been set for ExCo meetings; if so, of the quorum; whether it has assessed the impact of a situation where two or more ExCo Members are taking leave/being suspended from duty for an indefinite period on the operation of the ExCo; if it has, of the assessment results; if the assessment results indicate that there will be adverse impact, of the Government's solutions for such a situation; (c) while the Government has indicated that, in respect of those ExCo Members taking leave of absence and being suspended from duty, the Government will cease to pay such Members any allowances and send them any ExCo meeting documents, whether the Government has any guidelines requiring other ExCo Members not to exchange views with such ExCo Members in respect of polices, ExCo business and other issues; (d) whether it will conduct integrity checking of ExCo Members again on account of the reasons for their taking leave of absence or being suspended from duty; whether the Government currently has any guidelines requiring an ExCo Non-official Member's appointment be revoked under the specified circumstances; if so, of the details, including whether an ExCo Member is required to step down from office during the period when he/she is being prosecuted but the case has not yet been concluded; and (e) whether it has drawn up guidelines to deal with the situation where an ExCo Member is required to withdraw from discussions at ExCo meetings for a prolonged period due to conflict of interest; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; in respect of individual Non-official Members, (i) of the highest number of times of absence from meetings and (ii) the highest number of withdrawals from discussions due to conflict of interest, since the inauguration of the incumbent Government; of the number of ExCo meetings held since the inauguration of the incumbent Government, and set out the attendance of ExCo Members at meetings and their withdrawals from discussions due to conflict of interest according to the table below? Date of meeting Total number of discussion items Number of discussion items where one or more Official Members withdrew from discussions due to conflict of interest Number of discussion items where one or more Non-official Members withdrew from discussions due to conflict of interest Number of Official Members who were present at the meeting Number of Non-official Members who were present at the meeting Number of Non-official Members who withdrew from discussions Number of Official Members who withdrew from discussions Total:
*18. Hon CHAN Hak-kan to ask: (Translation)
The Chief Executive mentioned in the 2013 Policy Address that "more than half of the private dwellings have a saleable area smaller than 50 square metres. Do we have the courage to make it our vision to improve the living space for the future generation?" A member of the Long Term Housing Strategy Steering Committee has reportedly pointed out recently that the average living space per person in Hong Kong should be increased. However, earlier on, a private developer planned to put up for sale "shoebox units" with an average area of merely 200-odd square feet, which runs counter to the aforesaid vision. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) whether the Government has kept track of the changes in the average living space per person in Hong Kong in the past decade; if it has, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (b) of the numbers of subsidized housing units of different saleable areas constructed/to be constructed in the past three years, this year and the next three years (set out in the table below);
Subsidized housing Year
Flat type2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Public housing Small Two to three-person One-bedroom Two-bedroom Three-bedroom Home Ownership Scheme Small Two to three-person One-bedroom Two-bedroom Three-bedroom
(c) of the current number of undeveloped residential sites with a plot ratio of 1 or below in the New Territories; whether it will consider raising, as appropriate, the plot ratios of residential sites in the New Territories which are not located in the new development areas, in order to meet the housing demands; and (d) whether the Government will draw up short, medium and long term plans in order to achieve the aforesaid vision?
*19. Hon LEUNG Kwok-hung to ask: (Translation)
Although the Government separately replied to my questions regarding the Youth Pre-employment Training Programme and Youth Work Experience and Training Scheme ("the Scheme") of the Labour Department ("LD") on 24 April, 8 May and 15 May this year, quite a number of members of the public and social workers have continued to relay to me the problems of the Scheme. They pointed out that when problems of the training courses arose, some "authorized persons" of the training bodies which had been appointed under the Scheme (i.e. the persons authorized by the training bodies to sign all applications for reimbursement of course fees under the Scheme and normally the persons-in-charge of the training courses in the training bodies assume such role) had covered up their own fault of improper supervision and shifted, without verifying the facts or by using false information, the blame to those social workers who had already left the positions, so that their training bodies could continue to receive LD's funding for the courses. In its reply to my question on 8 May, the Government indicated that "a training body reported to LD on its own initiative that its internal audit revealed that it had not complied with the proposal in organizing one course and undertook to refund all monies related to that course". Regarding the aforesaid case, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) given that training bodies are required to submit the application forms for reimbursement of course fees which have been duly signed and confirmed by the authorized persons in order to obtain fees reimbursement from LD, and it has been set out in the notes of the form that information provided for reimbursement claims "must be reported accurately. Anyone who wilfully makes false representation or provides false information commits an offence", whether LD had investigated if the authorized person(s) of the aforesaid case had submitted any false information to LD; if so, of the investigation results; whether LD had referred the aforesaid case to law enforcement agencies for follow-up; if not, whether the Government has assessed if the way that LD handled the case has amounted to harbouring some suspected law offender(s) and if this might nullify the warning set out in the form; (b) whether the authorized person(s) of the training body in the aforesaid case was/were registered social workers; if so, whether LD had referred the case to the Social Workers Registration Board for follow-up; if not, of the reasons for that; (c) of the date and title of the course concerned in the aforesaid case, the amount of course fee previously reimbursed by LD and the date of reimbursement, as well as the date on which the training body concerned refunded the monies; if LD cannot provide such information, whether the Government has assessed if this might obstruct this Council's monitoring of the use of public money; (d) whether it has assessed if the relevant LD officers had, when handling the application for course fee reimbursement in the aforesaid case, failed to monitor the reimbursement properly; if the assessment result is in the affirmative, whether such officers had been subject to disciplinary actions; whether it has assessed if LD was lacking awareness in the aforesaid case; (e) whether LD officers had conducted any inspections during the period when the course concerned in the aforesaid case was being held; if so, of the format, number of hours and times of such inspections, and the reasons why the situation that the course concerned "had not complied with the proposal" still has arisen despite the inspections conducted; if no inspection had been conducted and the course fee had been reimbursed merely based on the information provided by the training body, whether it has assessed if the relevant LD officers had failed to monitor the reimbursement properly; (f) whether LD had, upon receipt of the notification by the training body of the aforesaid case, conducted any in-depth investigation so as to ascertain if the explanations given by the training body were all true; if it had conducted such an investigation, whether it had gathered information from all persons concerned; if it had not conducted the investigation, whether the Government has assessed if the relevant LD officers had failed to monitor the reimbursement properly; (g) whether LD had penalized the training body and the authorized person(s) concerned in the aforesaid case; if so, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; (h) whether LD had disqualified the training body of the aforesaid case for organizing training courses under the Scheme; if so, of the date on which the training body was disqualified; if not, the number of courses organized by that training body with funding provided since the case was revealed, the total amount of funding involved, and whether LD had accepted the application form for reimbursement of course fees signed by the same authorized person(s) of that training body; if so, of the reasons for that and whether it had stepped up its monitoring of that training body; (i) given that the Government had, in its reply on 8 May, refused to disclose to this Council the name of the training body concerned in the aforesaid case, and the names of the five training bodies which had received LD's written advice/warnings, whether such refusal had any legal basis; if so, of such legal basis; if not, whether the Government has assessed if this involved LD harbouring those training bodies which had breached the relevant regulations, and whether this might obstruct this Council's monitoring of the use of public money and undermine the public's access right to information; whether the names of those training bodies will only be disclosed after the public have lodged and won a judicial review in this regard; and (j) whether the authorized person(s) of the Hong Kong Federation of Youth Groups ("HKFYG") (one of the training bodies under the Scheme) had submitted false information to LD, and whether HKFYG had organized any training course not in accordance with its proposal and had previously refunded LD the relevant course fees, in the past four years; if so, of the date(s) and title(s) of such course(s), the amount of course fees previously reimbursed by LD and the date of reimbursement, the amount refunded and the date of such refund by this training body, as well as the way in which that LD handled this case?
*20. Hon Emily LAU to ask: (Translation)
In connection with the employment situation of persons with disabilities ("PWDs") in the Government and public organizations, will the Executive Authorities inform this Council:
(a) of the number of cases in each of the years from 2004 to 2012 in which PWDs were referred by the Selective Placement Division ("SPD") of the Labour Department to apply for jobs in the Government; the annual changes of such numbers and the causes of such changes; (b) of the current number of PWDs employed in the Government and the percentage of such number in the total number of government employees, with a breakdown by post (set out in a table); (c) as it has been reported that a PWD has been unsuccessful in her job applications through SPD since 2009 even though she has been arranged to attend an interview each month for government posts, of the criteria adopted by the authorities for employing PWDs; and (d) whether the authorities will consider afresh taking the lead in formulating a quota system for employing PWDs in government departments and public organizations by specifying a mandatory target for employing PWDs at 2% of the total number of employees; if they will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
*21. Dr Hon CHIANG Lai-wan to ask: (Translation)
I have received complaints from members of the public about the serious problem of fly-tipping of construction waste in old districts such as Sham Shui Po, Kowloon City, Yau Tsim Mong, etc. They pointed out that quite a number of flats in the old buildings in such districts had been converted by the owners into "sub-divided units" for renting out, and the alteration works involved had produced a large quantity of construction waste. Since the streets and scavenging lanes in the vicinity of these buildings were not managed by owners' corporations or property management companies, some renovation workers had dumped the construction waste in such places. These members of the public considered that such practice not only polluted the environment, but also blocked fire escapes, posing hazard to the safety of the residents. Although they had taken the initiative to report such cases to the Environmental Protection Department, law enforcement officers were unable to institute prosecutions against the offenders as the fly-tippers had already left when these officers arrived at the scene. In this connection, will the Government inform this Council:
(a) of the number of complaints received in the past three years by the authorities about fly-tipping of construction waste in the vicinity of buildings or by the roadside in urban areas, broken down by District Council district, and among those complaints, the number of cases in which the persons concerned had been prosecuted; (b) of the respective numbers of inspections and surprise checks conducted by the authorities for combating fly-tipping of construction waste in urban areas, the manpower dedicated to conducting such inspections and instituting related prosecutions, and the quantity of construction waste removed, in the past three years; (c) whether the authorities have taken further measures to combat fly-tipping of construction waste; if they have, of the details; if not, the reasons for that; and (d) whether it will consider amending the existing legislation to empower officers from the Police, Fire Services Department as well as the Food and Environmental Hygiene Department to institute prosecutions against fly-tippers of construction waste; if it will, of the details; if not, the reasons for that?
* For written reply